Privilege / Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous

Journals p. 853

Debates p. 7182

Background

Mr. Roberts (York-Simcoe) raised a question of privilege because the Government refused to pay him the terminal gratuity normally provided to those leaving the public service. He claimed that he had no alternative but to raise the matter in the House as one of privilege because the payment is discretionary, leaving him no recourse through the courts. Mr. Roberts noted that the Government had refused to make the payment, despite the admitted justice of his case, because they contended that he could be deprived of his seat as a Member if the payment were made. This legal interpretation was disputed by Mr. Roberts, and, he asserted, he had been penalized and deprived of a customary entitlement because he had been elected a Member. The Speaker immediately ruled.

Issue

Is there a question of privilege in this case arising from the fact of the Member's election to the House?

Decision

"Since there is some doubt about the interpretation of the precedents in this situation", there is an inclination to resolve the issue in favour of the Member who will be allowed to move his motion of privilege. (Following the Speaker's decision, Mr. Roberts moved a motion which was immediately agreed to by the House.]

Reasons given by the Speaker

''At first blush", the matter was viewed as a question of the Member's rights as a former civil servant. This would tend to make the question one of a grievance against the Government. On the other hand, "the House has always exercised great care in attempting to protect all its Members".

References

Debates, March 27, 1969, pp. 7181-2.

Journals, April 24, 1969, pp. 937-8 (The Fifth Report of the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections).